Money for Nothing: the Universal Basic Income

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 29867
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Money for Nothing: the Universal Basic Income

Post by Warren »

D.A. Ridgely wrote:
17 Feb 2020, 11:46

If you are looking to give Marx some credit, and I think it's fair to say that the man was better than his disciples (something that could also be said about, oh, say, Freud), he was a pioneer in rejecting idealism even if he did embrace Hegel's dialectic lock, stock and barrel. That's not nothing.
I am so far from even I can't see it from here.
Both Marx and Freud* were spectacularly wrong about everything. Like Bill Kristol wrong.


*I studied both men accademically. So yes, I've read The Communist Manifesto and several of Freud's writings.
Economics doesn't work that way. It simply doesn't.
The human brain doesn't work that way. It simply doesn't.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20227
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Money for Nothing: the Universal Basic Income

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

Warren wrote:
17 Feb 2020, 11:54
D.A. Ridgely wrote:
17 Feb 2020, 11:46

If you are looking to give Marx some credit, and I think it's fair to say that the man was better than his disciples (something that could also be said about, oh, say, Freud), he was a pioneer in rejecting idealism even if he did embrace Hegel's dialectic lock, stock and barrel. That's not nothing.
I am so far from even I can't see it from here.
Both Marx and Freud* were spectacularly wrong about everything. Like Bill Kristol wrong.


*I studied both men accademically. So yes, I've read The Communist Manifesto and several of Freud's writings.
Economics doesn't work that way. It simply doesn't.
The human brain doesn't work that way. It simply doesn't.
To say you "studied Marx" because you read a pamphlet that first ran 28 pp and still takes the average reader less than five hours to read is like saying I studied electrical engineering because I used to have a subscription to "Popular Electronics." Same with Freud and, no, btw, I'm hardly an expert on either.

Yes, in some really fundamental ways both Marx and Freud were dead wrong. I wasn't suggesting otherwise. So, also, that great empiricist Locke was wrong about the labor theory of value and the field of psychology has been riddled with bad theory as far back as Aristotle. And so it goes.

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 29867
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Money for Nothing: the Universal Basic Income

Post by Warren »

D.A. Ridgely wrote:
17 Feb 2020, 12:06
To say you "studied Marx" because you read a pamphlet that first ran 28 pp and still takes the average reader less than five hours to read is like saying I studied electrical engineering because I used to have a subscription to "Popular Electronics." Same with Freud and, no, btw, I'm hardly an expert on either.
It's a fair cop.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

Post Reply